Page 164 - Battleground The Media Volume 1 and 2
P. 164

Embedd ng Journal sts: How Close Is Too Close?  |  1

              the war. In the case of U.S. coverage, a concerted effort was made to avoid viewer
              empathy for wounded Iraqis through various verbal and visual strategies. In the
              rare case the wounded Iraqis were shown on American TV, the images were
              identified as propaganda for Saddam Hussein. Dead and wounded American
              soldiers were also rarely seen.


                ConCLusion

                Embedded reporting, precisely because it provides such newsworthy reports,
              forces  the  coverage  towards  a  simplistic  narrative  in  which  wider  questions
              about the war are excluded. Indeed, it could be argued that to the degree that
              embeds succeeded in providing objective, exciting, relatively uncensored British
              reports, such reporting made the story of war more compelling. This explains
              the Pentagon’s enthusiasm for the program. In short, if the details did not always
              go their way, the thrust of the coverage was very much on their terms.
                Both in Britain and the United States, the historical significance of the role of
              embedding was in constructing a narrative confined to the progress of the war.
              Telling an exciting, real-time, visually stimulating narrative of conflict forced
              the wider questions about the war to the background, and made the moment of
              victory, rather than, for example, the long-term welfare of the Iraqi people, the
              climax of the narrative. Even when British embedded reporters were demon-
              strably impartial, it was within the confines of a limited perspective—a focus on
              the progress of the fighting rather than why the war was being fought or what
              its consequences might be. Without that discussion, the media did not fulfill
              their role in a democratic system, to provide the public with the information it
              needed to understand the national security policies, and the long-term effects of
              military actions taken by its government.
              see also Alternative Media in the United States; Anonymous Sources, Leaks,
              and National Security; Bias and Objectivity; Journalists in Peril; Narrative Power
              and Media Influence; Nationalism and the Media; Paparazzi and Photographic
              Ethics; Parachute Journalism; Presidential Stagecraft and Militainment; Propa-
              ganda Model; Reality Television; Sensationalism, Fear Mongering and Tabloid
              Media.

              Further reading: Andersen, Robin. A Century of Media, A Century of War. New York: Peter
                 Lang. 2006; Bennett, W. Lance. News: The Politics of Illusion., 6th ed. New York: Pearson,
                 2005; Center for Constitutional Rights. Federal Lawsuit, US District Court: Southern
                 District of New York, January 1991; Hedges, Chris. War Is a Force That Gives Us Mean-
                 ing. New York: Anchor Books, 2002; Knightly, Phillip. The First Casualty: The War Cor-
                 respondent as Hero and Myth-Maker from the Crimea to Kosovo. Baltimore: The Johns
                 Hopkins University Press, 2002; Lewis, Justin, Rod Brookes, Nick Mosdell, and Terry
                 Threadgold. Shoot First and Ask Questions Later: Media Coverage of the War in Iraq.
                 New York: Peter Lang, 2006; MacArthur, John. The Second Front: Censorship and Propa-
                 ganda in the Gulf War. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.

                                                       Robin Andersen and Justin Lewis
   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169